No it wasn't.

The Wii was.

Kinect wasn't.

when i saw them attached to their belts I instantly thought about someone seducing a 3ds girl and stealing her treasure.

Lol, I was going to say exactly this. XD

Of the 3 only Microsoft is actually really putting something different out the others are offering much of what we have seen already. Will it succeed I cannot say, I know I thought the Wii was a stupid name after all who would name a console after a bodily function and wow was I wrong.

I will say this though although they have definitely got the most interesting concept in Kinect and it will be awesome in lots of applications it will simply not work in others. Of course the other systems cannot do things that only Kinect can do. So long as they know the limitations it will be fine. Will it actually be a big surprise in the way Nintendo was?

unlikely...

but it could and that is the exciting thing about Microsoft Kinect.

I was looking around for this and saw something that said otherwise, so if it is playable right now, then sorry for the misinformation. (wasn't intentional)

I do disagree with those saying Microsoft is trying something new, though. I don't think Kinect's games really do anything the Wii or Eyetoy hasn't already tried, it's just going about things in a different way.

It's definitely not like seeing Wii Sports back in 2006.

Essentially for Kinect to be disruptive it needs three basic things as far as I can remember.

1. It needs to be good enough to serve the market and its purpose. Good enough doesn't mean perfect though, so Kinect can be flawed as it likely is in a few ways but so long as its good enough it meets the criteria. Wii hardware for example is what you'd call good enough as an alternative example.

2. It needs to serve underserved/unserved people. Essentially their angle is that Xbox 360 Kinect does 'more' than the Wii
with regards to media playback serving people who would otherwise not play games, it does multiplayer simpler in that people can drop in and out of games without fumbling with accessories and it reduces clutter. Essentially they say the Xbox 360 can do more than 6 accessories for the Wii to achieve with 1. I.E. One Kinect is worth 2 Wii motes, 2 Wii M , one sensor bar and the Wii Fit pad and never needs to be recharged whereas the Wii requires IIRC 7 AA batteries.

3. There are asynchronous motivations of the disrupter/disruptee and the diruptee cannot easily replicate the disruptors business model. The angle here is that Nintendo is a games software company first whereas Microsoft is a services software company first. Kinect is designed to service people who would never pick up a Wiimote whilst the Wiimote is designed to service those who would never pick up a standard controller. Microsoft doesn't care if they never sell a person a single game in 10 years so long as they can entice them with other services. This is why I say Kinect (Natal) is after the low side of the Wii audience whereas Move is attempting to stand in front of Nintendos natural progression up the market.

Well what we are reading in forums is brutal to Kinect. This is what happened to the Wii in 2006.  The press that was trying the Wii was favorable. The press trying Kinect are favorable. Not over the top and no press was predicting the Wii to be huge when it released. No press thought WiiSports would drive Wii sales.  Sorta how people are calling the Kinect software and the Kinect.

O_o

Yeah... what's that all about? :s